Re: Ironic Use of Attitudinals

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>]

And writes:

There are many different competing and in some cases equally
valid definitions of what counts as language, or as a language.

Do any of them include metonymy?

But only by one of these definitions (a set of rules generating
sentences (sound-meaning pairings)) is a language *designable*.

Would inventing a rule that said "do not use metonymy" constitute language
 design, using a definition of language which includes metonymy?

Chris